الفهرس 
INTRODUCTIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 16 |  |  |
| | | from | 16 | | |
Abstract
Phacoemulsification has become the treatment of choice for cataract surgery over the past two decades due to Improvements in technology and surgical techniques. (Dupont-Monod et al., 2009).
Cataract surgery using phacoemulsification techniques and instrumentation offers a number of attractive benefits to both the surgeon and patient. The principal advantage is a smaller incision size, which decreases the amount of tissue injury, reduces the amount of postoperative pain and inflammation, and provides a more rapid refractive stabilization (Watson and Sunderraj, 1992) with less astigmatism induced by the procedure. The smaller incision also allows minimal restrictions on the patient’s physical activities, even in the early postoperative period (Neumann et al, 1989).
Divide and conquer technique provides systematic fracturing of the nucleus within the capsular bag using the phaco tip and a surgical spatula (Gimbel, 1991). It involves the creation of two deep grooves in the nucleus that intersect centrally, followed by the cracking of the nucleus into four separate quadrants (Shepherd, 1990). The depth of the groove should be appropriate to allow visualization of red reflex. Stop and chop technique is a method for phacoemulsification within the capsular bag in which the procedure begins as a routine nuclear cracking technique and then stops. It continues as a chop technique (Koch and Katzen, 1994).
Phaco rolling technique for soft and medium-hard cataracts decreases phaco time and enhances the safety of the procedure. The lens is aspirated onto the phaco tip and then the lens is rotated. The small, hard, central nucleus is usually emulsified at the end (Güell et al., 2004). This study compared between three techniques of phacoemulsification (divide and conquer, stop and chop and phaco rolling) according to phaco parameters adjustment and postoperative visual acuity. It was found that there was equal and significant improvement with the 3 techniques from preoperative to 1 month postoperative BCVA. There was no significant difference between the 3 techniques as regards preoperative and postoperative IOP. There was no significant difference between the 3 groups concerning 1 month postoperative corneal oedema.
Divide and conquer technique required higher power than stop and chop and phaco rolling techniques. Stop and chop technique required higher vaccum and aspiration rate while phaco rolling technique required moderate vaccum and aspiration rate and divide and conquer technique required lower vaccum and aspiration rate.